The Student Room Group

Tory MP's vote AGAINST allowing 3000 refugee children into the UK

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36134837

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/25/tories-vote-against-accepting-3000-child-refugees

Was surprised not to see this thread already, although I may have missed it, it seems the Tory powers that be on here have nothing to say.

Scroll to see replies

Butbutbutbut Michael Gove and Boris Johnson told us we have no control over our borders!!!!!!
Reply 2
This makes me incredibly sad.

1. It's only 3000 - I am sure we can fit 3000 vulnerable children in
2. They're children - I know people object to letting refugees in because they "don't share the same values as us", however, they're children. I doubt these children have any set values - children can learn and adapt.
Original post by drowzee
This makes me incredibly sad.

1. It's only 3000 - I am sure we can fit 3000 vulnerable children in
2. They're children - I know people object to letting refugees in because they "don't share the same values as us", however, they're children. I doubt these children have any set values - children can learn and adapt.


Well do something about it. Volunteer to sponsor a refugee child in a camp.

Send them all your spare money. Go and work with refugees so you feel less "sad."

Do something constructive to help rather than emoting on a student website.

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.

Any more than you will, individually.
Original post by JezWeCan!
Well do something about it. Volunteer to sponsor a refugee child in a camp.

Send them all your spare money. Go and work with refugees so you feel less "sad."

Do something constructive to help rather than emoting on a student website.

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.

Any more than you will, individually.


It's easy to be an armchair philanthropist because you can feel all good and superior without having to put in any real time and effort into a cause.
they'll likely go to some *other* european welfare state, no worries
Original post by JezWeCan!
Well do something about it. Volunteer to sponsor a refugee child in a camp.

Send them all your spare money. Go and work with refugees so you feel less "sad."

Do something constructive to help rather than emoting on a student website.

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.

Any more than you will, individually.


Well said. This my friends is the distinct difference between virtue and virtue signalling
Boo hoo, we're not letting some people.
Original post by JezWeCan!
Well do something about it. Volunteer to sponsor a refugee child in a camp.

Send them all your spare money. Go and work with refugees so you feel less "sad."

Do something constructive to help rather than emoting on a student website.

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.

Any more than you will, individually.


That's a crap argument, nothing wrong with arguing that taxpayers should house the 3000, it's not YOUR money it's OUR money.
Children or "children"?
I'm ashamed to be British sometimes. These are kids, they aren't ****ing jihadis. It was 3000. 3000 kids that will now have to continue living in absolute poverty, being picked up by child traffickers and having their whole future taking away.

We aren't full. You can't get a GP appointment or a place in your school of choice because YOUR GOVERNMENT IS CUTTING FUNDING TO THE NHS AND SCHOOLS. House prices are going up BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSES.

This is pure and simple greed. Mostly from people who think they're "suffering" because they can't afford a new smart phone or they had to wait a few hours in A&E. Most people in this country couldn't even begin to comprehend the suffering that these refugees go through daily, because they've lived immensely privileged lives.

I'm honestly disgusted. I hate this country.
Original post by That Bearded Man
That's a crap argument, nothing wrong with arguing that taxpayers should house the 3000, it's not YOUR money it's OUR money.


Exactly, it's everyones money, not just those that believe we should help or those that believe we shouldn't. The default position of spending however, would be not to pay for it.

Although it's difficult to say what the majority want in this regard, as the house of commons does not represent the voting population.
Original post by JordanL_
. Most people in this country couldn't even begin to comprehend the suffering that these refugees go through daily, because they've lived immensely privileged lives.
This may be so, and that is a great argument for donating time and money to helping them on an individual basis. It is not however, a strong argument for donating other peoples money to those outside of the society.
Original post by Farm_Ecology
Exactly, it's everyones money, not just those that believe we should help or those that believe we shouldn't. The default position of spending however, would be not to pay for it.

Although it's difficult to say what the majority want in this regard, as the house of commons does not represent the voting population.
This may be so, and that is a great argument for donating time and money to helping them on an individual basis. It is not however, a strong argument for donating other peoples money to those outside of the society.


I'm not rich. I don't have enough money to save 3000 people.

We're one of the richest countries in the world. We have a moral obligation to help these people.

What really disgusts me, though, are the people who bitch on and on as if we can't afford it, and as if they're the poorest, worst-off people in the world. Just living in the UK makes you one of the most privileged and well-off people ever to have lived. These people really don't understand how lucky they are.
Original post by JordanL_
I'm not rich. I don't have enough money to save 3000 people.
That's the argument I hear all the time. "I can't help them, but I want to force everyone else to."


Original post by JordanL_
We have a moral obligation to help these people.


No we dont.

Original post by JordanL_
What really disgusts me, though, are the people who bitch on and on as if we can't afford it,


I'm not saying we cant afford it, of course we can. I'm saying we shouldn't, surplus should be helping the citizens of the nation, not citizens of other nations.
Original post by JordanL_
I'm ashamed to be British sometimes. These are kids, they aren't ****ing jihadis. It was 3000. 3000 kids that will now have to continue living in absolute poverty, being picked up by child traffickers and having their whole future taking away.

We aren't full. You can't get a GP appointment or a place in your school of choice because YOUR GOVERNMENT IS CUTTING FUNDING TO THE NHS AND SCHOOLS. House prices are going up BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T BUILDING ENOUGH HOUSES.

This is pure and simple greed. Mostly from people who think they're "suffering" because they can't afford a new smart phone or they had to wait a few hours in A&E. Most people in this country couldn't even begin to comprehend the suffering that these refugees go through daily, because they've lived immensely privileged lives.

I'm honestly disgusted. I hate this country.


*looks at data* I didn't realise that cutting of funding means more money is given, bit of an odd definition you have there. As for housing, it is not the responsibility of the government to build homes, the closest to it you get is arguably their responsibility to encourage house building.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Farm_Ecology
That's the argument I hear all the time. "I can't help them, but I want to force everyone else to



I'm not saying we cant afford it, of course we can. I'm saying we shouldn't, surplus should be helping the citizens of the nation, not citizens of other nations.


👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Original post by JezWeCan!

Even if we did help this 3000 so what? There are millions of people in desperate situations like this all over the world. We can't do anything about it as a country, won't do anything about it.


That is a rather defeatist attitude. Could and can't are completely different things. As a country, we could do something about it. Sadly though, the comfortable MPs of the Home Counties have decided to turn a blind eye and leave the problem to someone else.
Original post by JordanL_
I'm ashamed to be British sometimes. These are kids, they aren't ****ing jihadis. It was 3000. 3000 kids that will now have to continue living in absolute poverty


They rejected a proposal to take in 3000 children who are already claiming asylum in other European countries, presumably mostly Germany, Sweden and Austria. They did not reject the proposal to take 3000 from Syria directly.
Poor children, born into civil unrest and developed countries are unable to help them. No their fault they were born into this and yet we as a nation that can help choose to keep our hands clean.

Humanity is cruel and heartless.
Original post by Youngmetro
Poor children, born into civil unrest and developed countries are unable to help them. No their fault they were born into this and yet we as a nation that can help choose to keep our hands clean.

Humanity is cruel and heartless.


I'm not sure what the relevance of it not being their fault is, is it ours?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending